dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
319927
wingman99
join:2003-12-18
Opelika, AL

wingman99 to skmt

Member

to skmt

Re: Comcast is using Sandvine to manage P2P Connections

said by skmt :

I don't understand why some people keep saying that this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality. To be sure, this is unrelated to the original issue of charging content providers a premium to ensure unfettered access to their content. Instead it's just another example demonstrating that we need to expand our concept of Net Neutrality.

There are those that seem to have an interest in erecting walls between us, claiming that they are protecting the rights of the majority from abuse by a dangerous minority. But it's not the majority that decides what's supposedly best for everyone--therein lies the rub. An even smaller minority of stuffed suits looking after their portfolios are the ones creating an artificial "us-versus-them" mentality.

That might be fine and well for those that play by their rules, until they start changing to rules to suit the thickness of their wallets.
I agree what happen to people saying it's my upload speed and i can do what i want with it, we're taking upload people that is a small amount.

I cant believe this, it's the minority that does the peer to peer upload they should spend more time and money expanding the network for tv video or just video for the future. If they think peer to peer upload is a killer just wait till people want to do more then surf the web pages.

It's all wording, like this is going to some how solve problems with bandwidth usage, like you can really tell the difference in your internet connection since they started this.

If anything i see more lag complaints during heavy usage by comcast customers because of the traffic sniffing and shaping.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to jig

MVM

to jig
said by jig:

damage is an element of a properly pleaded tort, but a tort is really about conduct, the tortuous conduct of the defendant.
And the tort in this case is?
Movieman420
join:2007-08-28

Movieman420 to funchords

Member

to funchords
Offhand I'd say deception and forgery..few more I'm sure...but I'm no lawyer. (Slept at a holiday inn last night tho..lol)

Quote from Sandvine product page:

*Improves the subscriber experience through enhanced P2P performance

Yeah right.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS

MVM

said by Movieman420:

Offhand I'd say deception and forgery..few more I'm sure...but I'm no lawyer. (Slept at a holiday inn last night tho..lol)
Forgery is a crime, not a tort. Deception is only a "tort" if it results in damages, it is not a tort in itself.

jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA

jig to NormanS

Member

to NormanS
the tortuous conduct here might be the unpublicized reduction in service without the concomitant reduction in price. the related damages can be just the difference in the value of the service, but it could be as much as any business lost because of the change. what business would be related to seeding torrents and still be ok under a residential contract? well, probably not any. i suppose there might be an argument that a company that distributes their code through torrents might be able to sue on their own damages by tying in the damage to the comcast customers.

anyway, you would think a lot of this would be covered by the contract between the customers and comcast, but if the contract doesn't cover this specifically, or even if it covers it generally and it looks like comcast is taking advantage of broad language, you can still attack it like you'd attack a typical tort.
jig

jig to NormanS

Member

to NormanS
said by NormanS:

Forgery is a crime, not a tort.
just like murder and/or manslaughter. which is why we have wrongful death suits.

forgery would probably be considered a type of trespass, an intentional tort.
modemslayer
join:2003-12-11
Spokane, WA

modemslayer to funchords

Member

to funchords
Maybe it's time for a new, more robust P2P protocol. Certainly it's a game of cat-and-mouse, but there must be some way to make a protocol more future-proof than the BT of today.

I think the best strategy will be one that forces an ISP to be so heavy-handed that they will fear a consumer backlash more than "fighting the p2p war".

Some random thoughts / strategies...

Connectionless:

Base it on UDP. Sure, someone could inject bad packets into the stream, but that could be solved, and the peers would at least have full control over connection management. Let the ISPs at least spend the money to legitimately shape the traffic, instead of the weak-ass RST injections that undermine TCP.

Piggyback on top of another protocol (steganography):

If you base it on HTTP, it might be possible to make the traffic look like regular web browser traffic. Or VoIP, SMTP, etc. Hide the traffic in plain sight! HTTPS maybe? Are ISPs really prepared to throw the baby out with the bath water just to throttle p2p? Maybe they can get away with VPN traffic, but other infrastructure protocols? Make a p2p protocol that does such a good job of masking itself that ISPs have to throttle every packet on the network! You could even have 10 peers all impersonating a different "legitimate" protocol. Peer A appears to be sending an email attachment, while peer B appears to be part of a gaming session, while peer C appears to be an online banking session, etc.

Bastardize TCP (it's already happening anyway):

Couldn't a protocol like BT hook into the TCP stack and decide for itself whether to honor an RST? Or find a way to tweak the packet when it sends an RST, such that it can't be forged? Or negotiate its own connection tear-downs that bypass TCP?

Adaptive protocol:

One that senses what network it's on and changes its tactics on a per-peer basis. Certainly two peers can compare notes and detect man-in-the-middle attacks, and adjust their strategy / methods accordingly. Are we on comcast? Then negotiate our own tear-downs. Are we on rogers? Make it look like a world of warcraft gaming session!

Honestly, all the ISPs are doing is driving innovation, so I'm not against Sandvine at all. I look forward to seeing it rendered useless.

telcolackey5
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA

telcolackey5

Member

You can play cat and mouse with this, but I predict that eventually it will come down to two things.

#1 p2p is a clear violation of almost all broadband providers ToS. It IS making the broadband connection the ISP sold YOU available to 3rd parties to profit from and millions of Internet users to utilize. For Comcast you are violating #9 and #14 of »www6.comcast.net/terms/use/

#2 The difference between speed and usage. I have 200amps in my home, but if I use the full 200amps 7x24 I am going to have to pay for it.

I think what needs to happen is not cut people off or play shaping games. If someone really wants to leave the faucets on, TV, lights, windows open, etc 7x24, they should pay for it. If let your neighbor plug into your outside outlet to run his pool heater, you will have to pay for it.
modemslayer
join:2003-12-11
Spokane, WA

modemslayer

Member

said by telcolackey5:

I think what needs to happen is not cut people off or play shaping games. If someone really wants to leave the faucets on, TV, lights, windows open, etc 7x24, they should pay for it. If let your neighbor plug into your outside outlet to run his pool heater, you will have to pay for it.
Agreed. The electric company doesn't do deep inspection to see what appliances you are running and randomly disable your toaster if they deem you are using it too often, or decide for you which appliances are legitimate and which aren't. You pay for what you use. The phone company doesn't randomly leave you unable to dial people you spend 10 hours on the phone with. Again, you pay for what you use. So there must be some pricing options - maybe reasonable cap + overage - where most folks can be happy that they're seeing the value they expect for the money they shell out.

However, if everyone turns on their toaster at the same time, it doesn't knock your local power grid offline. The problem with cable is that it's not designed for everyone consuming large amounts of bandwidth at once. The underlying technology is flawed, and that's why cable companies are playing their games, rather than addressing the limitations of the technology.

telcolackey5
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA

2 edits

telcolackey5

Member

said by modemslayer:

The problem with cable is that it's not designed for everyone consuming large amounts of bandwidth at once. The underlying technology is flawed, and that's why cable companies are playing their games, rather than addressing the limitations of the technology.
Although we both agree with payment model, I disagree with your technology assessment. All Internet delivery technologies use an over subscription model and each has ways to address capacity. If you are in a FiOS neighborhood and all users started 8mbs downloads at the same time, a circuit would hit capacity. Same with DSL, Cable, T1, DS3, OC3, OC12, OC192, etc.

Cable can combine and split nodes, allocate frequencies, channel bundle, etc. to address capacity.

Mdoc
Ehh... munch munch... what's up, Doc?
Premium Member
join:2007-03-27
Sterling, VA

Mdoc to Movieman420

Premium Member

to Movieman420
said by Movieman420:

Offhand I'd say deception and forgery..few more I'm sure...but I'm no lawyer. (Slept at a holiday inn last night tho..lol)
...And I saved money by staying at home last night.

jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA

jig to telcolackey5

Member

to telcolackey5
said by telcolackey5:

#1 p2p is a clear violation of almost all broadband providers ToS. It IS making the broadband connection the ISP sold YOU available to 3rd parties to profit from and millions of Internet users to utilize. For Comcast you are violating #9 and #14 of »www6.comcast.net/terms/use/

#2 The difference between speed and usage. I have 200amps in my home, but if I use the full 200amps 7x24 I am going to have to pay for it.
why not just use the word "use" instad of utilize?

anyway,

if i'm making my bandwidth availabel to others, then i guess all the free email suppliers are going to have to play too, right? they're using my bandwidth both ways, using it to help me send attachments and emails on the upload, and sending me adds on the download. guess we'll have to shut all those off too.

in reality, i'm using my bandwidth to help me get what i want to get as quickly as i can. period.

the seed vs. usage has been argued for years. they've advertised it as a usage, not as a speed. they don't have anything in their TOS or elsewhere that says we should expcect to not use it at max speed all the time. in fact, they offer it as "always on, always fast". when i signed up with the electric company, they made it clear that i would have a connection charge per month, and then a sliding scale usage fee each month. not so with comcast.

it's all bunk, and stems from the same type of thinking that led enron to it's demise, except we're still feeling the effects of what they created in the american bandwidth markets.

bandwidth is not electricity. or water, or gas, or sewage treatment.
modemslayer
join:2003-12-11
Spokane, WA

modemslayer to telcolackey5

Member

to telcolackey5
said by telcolackey5:

Although we both agree with payment model, I disagree with your technology assessment. All Internet delivery technologies use an over subscription model and each has ways to address capacity. If you are in a FiOS neighborhood and all users started 8mbs downloads at the same time, a circuit would hit capacity. Same with DSL, Cable, T1, DS3, OC3, OC12, OC192, etc.

Cable can combine and split nodes, allocate frequencies, channel bundle, etc. to address capacity.
All utilities oversubscribe to some extent. I've been at a company in Southern California where everyone is sent home on a summer day because of rolling blackouts. During a national emergency the phone lines can go kaput due to millions calling their loved ones at the same time. My problem with ISPs (mostly cable) is the level of oversubscription. They underbuild their networks, advertise big fat pipes, and then villify the folks who actually use them, all without even giving them the tools to help manage their usage. The electric company can tell me how many KWh I use during a billing period. My cell phone carrier can show me how many minutes I'm using in real-time. But good luck getting the cable company to tell me that info unless I go over the secret cap (which I won't, but that's not the point.)

All my utilities are completely above-board except my cable connection.

telcolackey5
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA

telcolackey5

Member

said by modemslayer:

But good luck getting the cable company to tell me that info unless I go over the secret cap (which I won't, but that's not the point.)

All my utilities are completely above-board except my cable connection.
Agreed, but I think there are plenty of broadband companies that are or will be changing to that model. This way if people want to use more than 98% of everyone else, they can. It will just cost them.
telcolackey5

telcolackey5 to jig

Member

to jig
said by jig:

the seed vs. usage has been argued for years. they've advertised it as a usage, not as a speed.
Please quote your source.
said by jig:

they don't have anything in their TOS or elsewhere that says we should expcect to not use it at max speed all the time. in fact, they offer it as "always on, always fast".
Agreed on exact limits. There are clauses against using specific apps that are normally attributed to generating this much bandwidth however. See #9 and #14 in
»www6.comcast.net/terms/use/
modemslayer
join:2003-12-11
Spokane, WA

modemslayer to telcolackey5

Member

to telcolackey5
said by telcolackey5:

Agreed, but I think there are plenty of broadband companies that are or will be changing to that model. This way if people want to use more than 98% of everyone else, they can. It will just cost them.
...and conversely, the folks like my mom that use 2% of the bandwidth everyone else uses should pay something like 10$ per month. That's why I don't see companies like CC implementing a usage based pricing model - most people would see their bill go down. Right now it's win-win for the cable companies. Everyone is paying for a high usage model, but few are actually using it, and those that do are villified.

It's like a resturant advertising an all-you-can-eat buffet, knowing that most people don't eat that much, and those that do are quietly asked to leave (after being shown the fine print, which says 'all the average person would reasonably eat'.) And with Sandvine, it would be like the resturant taking away most of the prime rib when fat people walk in the door, claiming that they are holding the rest in reserve for the "normal" eaters.

jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA

jig to telcolackey5

Member

to telcolackey5
comcast mentions 24/7 customer support, doesn't that mean i get 24/7 use? and, specifically, in the subscriber agreement, it mentions outages and how a customer with more than 24 hours of outage gets a credit, pro-rata, and the only thing it mentions is "month", so we are paying for 24/7 use, because the loss of that use is what we get credit for.

9 and 14 don't mention bittorrent

hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium Member
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY

hobgoblin

Premium Member

"comcast mentions 24/7 customer support, doesn't that mean i get 24/7 use? "

Yes the service is available for you to use at any time.

Hob

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium Member
join:2001-08-02
La Porte, IN

1 edit

ztmike

Premium Member

Click for full size
Seeding here, at my max speed of 384upload

Nothing speical being used besides whats offered in utorrent, but, after my download was complete i just left them seeding.

(Just to be clear, Sandvine is in effect in my area)

SpaethCo
Digital Plumber
MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

SpaethCo to jig

MVM

to jig
said by jig:

9 and 14 don't mention bittorrent
#14:
run programs, equipment, or servers from the Premises that provide network content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises LAN (Local Area Network), also commonly referred to as public services or servers. Examples of prohibited services and servers include, but are not limited to, e-mail, Web hosting, file sharing, and proxy services and servers;

FairTriplePlay
@comcast.net

FairTriplePlay to ztmike

Anon

to ztmike
Same here...I have the Blast! 16/2 teir and can d/l and u/l at rated speeds with surges to 30/3. According to the RST script in this thread..Sandvine box has graced me with only a 20% avg RST rate...the affect of which is transparent. This is about principle..even tho I can still seed, CC has no right to forge ANYTHING that comes or goes from my computer(s)! End of story.
FairTriplePlay

FairTriplePlay to funchords

Anon

to funchords
Just read this:

»Comcast Defends Traffic Shaping [74] comments

The good ol 'I can't neither confirm nor deny' routine...

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to jig

MVM

to jig
said by jig:
said by NormanS:

Forgery is a crime, not a tort.
just like murder and/or manslaughter. which is why we have wrongful death suits.

forgery would probably be considered a type of trespass, an intentional tort.
I consider a wrongful death suit, in the case of a murder, or manslaughter conviction, a form of "double jeopardy". Put the person in jail, or take his money. Not both. It may be legal, but it is just wrong, to take a person's liberty and their money.
Movieman420
join:2007-08-28

Movieman420 to Mdoc

Member

to Mdoc
Looks like BitTorrent isn't the only target of CC's tatics.
Looks like Gnutella is getting hit as well.

»www.eff.org/deeplinks/20 ··· us-notes

If your gonna screw up, might as well be thorough I guess.

hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium Member
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY

1 recommendation

hobgoblin to FairTriplePlay

Premium Member

to FairTriplePlay
"This is about principle..even tho I can still seed, CC has no right to forge ANYTHING that comes or goes from my computer(s)! End of story."

But you still give them money every month?

Principle...Yeah.

Hob

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium Member
join:2001-08-02
La Porte, IN

ztmike

Premium Member

said by hobgoblin:

"This is about principle..even tho I can still seed, CC has no right to forge ANYTHING that comes or goes from my computer(s)! End of story."

But you still give them money every month?

Principle...Yeah.

Hob
For most people Comcast is their only option, so before you say something like that, think about it first.

hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium Member
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY

1 recommendation

hobgoblin

Premium Member

"For most people Comcast is their only option, so before you say something like that, think about it first."

No most people have a slower speed option.

DSL, Dish, Dial Up.

Or a more expensive one.

Business Class, TI Telco.

Think about that first.

Hob

EG
The wings of love
Premium Member
join:2006-11-18
Union, NJ

EG

Premium Member

There is also always the option of not being online at all...

How did we ever survive in the past without it ??

ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium Member
join:2001-08-02
La Porte, IN

ztmike to hobgoblin

Premium Member

to hobgoblin
said by hobgoblin:

"For most people Comcast is their only option, so before you say something like that, think about it first."

No most people have a slower speed option.

DSL, Dish, Dial Up.

Or a more expensive one.

Business Class, TI Telco.

Think about that first.

Hob
Like i said not EVERYBODY has those options or has a ton of money for the internet.

Most people who have some form up broadband don't want to go back to dailup, as their comcast connection is at least faster than that.

hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium Member
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY

1 recommendation

hobgoblin

Premium Member

"Most people who have some form up broadband don't want to go back to dailup, as their comcast connection is at least faster than that."

Well then they need to play nice in the sandbox.

"Like i said not EVERYBODY has those options or has a ton of money for the internet."

I think everyone that I have read about in this forum that got shut off found another way to access the net.

The fact that there are no other options is not Comcast's fault. Go Start an ISP...advertise yourself as unlimited...provide Bitching Customer service...charge 30 bucks a month....see how long before you go bankrupt.

Hob